What exactly does NIST say about collpase times

[remo]

Comedy hour in LaLa

Using a brick apartment building collapse as precedent for Pinocchio Sunders 'normal office furnishings fire' WTC cartooNIST malarkey, is as close to the game you guys get. WTC 7 was steel framed. I don't imagine it had a brick in it. It had 81 columns of steel meshed together beam and girder locked into one great grunting matrix of high grade builders steel Silverstein had strengthened to above specs. to serve the secure needs of the many Government agencies living within. It had the largest CIA field office outside Langely and you broken birds are trying to tell me it all suddenly dropped apart, AT FREE FALL, of a sudden, pulverizing over 50 acres of concrete flooring into noxious talcum powder because of 'normal office furnishings fires' on ONE floor, around ONE column seat already photographically proven OUT at the time of critical initiation? That goose don't fly. Office furnishings never evaporated that steel...boiled it? Ridiculous.
No steel framed high rise has EVER achieved free fall without demolition removing its resistance. Show me one! That's why is called 'no resistance', because there IS none. It dropped straight down into itself for 108'+ - without resistance. Even the creatioNIST Report acknowledged that. Bringing it to the point. You haven't got a leg to stand on. FreeFall is no resistance. No resistance is no columns. No columns is demolition.

 

[LSSBB]

Using a brick apartment building collapse as precedent for Pinocchio Sunders 'normal office furnishings fire' WTC cartooNIST malarkey, is as close to the game you guys get. WTC 7 was steel framed. I don't imagine it had a brick in it. It had 81 columns of steel meshed together beam and girder locked into one great grunting matrix of high grade builders steel Silverstein had strengthened to above specs. to serve the secure needs of the many Government agencies living within. It had the largest CIA field office outside Langely and you broken birds are trying to tell me it all suddenly dropped apart, AT FREE FALL, of a sudden, pulverizing over 50 acres of concrete flooring into noxious talcum powder because of 'normal office furnishings fires' on ONE floor, around ONE column seat already photographically proven OUT at the time of critical initiation? That goose don't fly. Office furnishings never evaporated that steel...boiled it? Ridiculous.
No steel framed high rise has EVER achieved free fall without demolition removing its resistance. Show me one! That's why is called 'no resistance', because there IS none. It dropped straight down into itself for 108'+ - without resistance. Even the creatioNIST Report acknowledged that. Bringing it to the point. You haven't got a leg to stand on. FreeFall is no resistance. No resistance is no columns. No columns is demolition.

It was not AT freefall for a measurably significant amount of time. The acceleration bounced around, with high uncertaintly, and probably exceeded freefall.

Bzzzt, remo is wrong wrong wrong again. And still pushes the wrong. That's a Pinocchio for you.

 

[beachnut]

... It had the largest CIA field office...

btw, the main office in NYC for the CIA was not affected by 911 attacks. So?

NIST and the CIA said what about collapse times? Do you know the topic? lol, a post with the dumbest stuff to support lies. 12 years of Failure. failure is 911 truth's only product. Except for Gage where he has taken in over a million dollars selling lies - Capitalism is the key to being a good 911 truth leader, secret capitalism under the smoke screen of 911 truth, the search for ... dollars for Gage, selling books for Griffith, and DVDs for Balsamo leading failed pilots with idiotic claims on 911.

Try to get on topic, or start your own thread of remo fantasy claims backed up with nothing. The free-fall stuff as support for 911 truth's fantasy is silly - keep up the great work, with 12 perfect years of no evidence, it is hard to get better at failure. Yet, 911 truth will, and can do it.

 

[pgimeno]

Using a brick apartment building collapse as precedent for Pinocchio Sunders 'normal office furnishings fire' WTC cartooNIST malarkey, is as close to the game you guys get. WTC 7 was steel framed. I don't imagine it had a brick in it.

You said building behaviour, not building type. You can move the goalposts all you want now, it's obvious you were caught with your pants off.

Office furnishings never evaporated that steel...boiled it? Ridiculous.

Completely agreed.

No steel framed high rise has EVER achieved free fall without demolition removing its resistance. Show me one!

Still clinging to the silly first-time argument? That works both ways. No building in history has ever survived a collision with a 767. Show me one! Why should the WTC towers be the first? No high-rise steel-framed building has ever survived fires that were unfought for 7 hours. Show me one! Why should WTC7 be the first?

That's why is called 'no resistance', because there IS none.

Wrong. And there's still a problem with that: demolitions do exhibit resistance, to the point that there's no demolition where the building (or the façade, as in this case) falls in free fall. So, it would be unprecedented by any demolition standards. Again, bitten by your own argument.

It dropped straight down into itself for 108'+ - without resistance.

Pretty much like the brick building I showed. Buildings under fire do that. Hardly surprising.

You haven't got a leg to stand on. FreeFall is no resistance. No resistance is no columns. No columns is demolition.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong, respectively. But I don't expect you to understand the physics principles involved in proving that the claim of no resistance has no basis.

 

[jaydeehess]

Using a brick apartment building collapse as precedent for Pinocchio Sunders 'normal office furnishings fire' WTC cartooNIST malarkey, is as close to the game you guys get.

However, in general concrete and brick are more resistant to heat damage than steel. Yet this structure collapsed and when it did, it did so with little tilt and mostly within its own footprint.
I note that your side holds up structures such as the Windsor as being analogous to the towers despite its concrete core and now you call for greater structural applicability.

WTC 7 was steel framed. I don't imagine it had a brick in it. It had 81 columns of steel meshed together beam and girder locked into one great grunting matrix of high grade builders steel Silverstein had strengthened to above specs.

Anyone know what remo is spouting about here? Silverstein had the structure altered?

to serve the secure needs of the many Government agencies living within. It had the largest CIA field office outside Langely

Do CIA agents weigh more than the average person? Did the entire structure have to be strengthened and altered to accommodate them after Silverstein acquired it? Are you deliberately setting up a straw man here or what?

and you broken birds are trying to tell me it all suddenly dropped apart, AT FREE FALL, of a sudden, pulverizing over 50 acres of concrete flooring into noxious talcum powder because of 'normal office furnishings fires' on ONE floor, around ONE column seat already photographically proven OUT at the time of critical initiation? That goose don't fly. Office furnishings never evaporated that steel...boiled it? Ridiculous.

The concrete was not all pulverized to talcum powder. You are either woefully misinformed or willfully telling untruths. You angry birds need to slow down and try to prove your own various allegations.

No steel framed high rise has EVER achieved free fall without demolition removing its resistance. Show me one! That's why is called 'no resistance', because there IS none. It dropped straight down into itself for 108'+ - without resistance. Even the creatioNIST Report acknowledged that. Bringing it to the point. You haven't got a leg to stand on. FreeFall is no resistance. No resistance is no columns. No columns is demolition.

Show me the studies that indicate free fall and greater than free fall can ONLY be achieved with the use of demolition charges. Come on angry bird prove your allegation. Once you do that you can move on to proving the existence of such charges in 7WTC.

 

[Robrob]

It had 81 columns of steel meshed together beam and girder locked into one great grunting matrix of high grade builders steel Silverstein had strengthened to above specs.

Link?

to serve the secure needs of the many Government agencies living within.

Link?

It had the largest CIA field office outside Langly

Link?

it all suddenly dropped apart, AT FREE FALL, of a sudden, pulverizing over 50 acres of concrete flooring into noxious talcum powder because of 'normal office furnishings fires' on ONE floor, around ONE column seat already photographically proven OUT at the time of critical initiation?

Multiple lies.

Office furnishings never evaporated that steel...boiled it? Ridiculous.

Correct. Which is why no one ever said it "evaporated" or "boiled." After being struck by the falling WTC, the steel softened after hours of out of control fires and lost the majority of structural integrity.

No steel framed high rise has EVER achieved free fall without demolition removing its resistance. Show me one!

No Truther has ever provided an example of a steel framed high rise achieving feel fall with demolition. Show me one!

That's why is called 'no resistance', because there IS none. It dropped straight down into itself for 108'+ - without resistance.

Where it then impacted with the rest of the building and continued to fall, with resistance. Why do Truthers always neglect to include that bit?

 

[jaydeehess]

Robrob, remo states that the building all of a sudden fell at free fall. Besides the lie that is his implication that free fall came on immediately, he ignores several seconds between the fall of the east penthouse and the fall of the north facade.

He also then is ignoring the various structural insults the building suffered over the course of approximately eight hours.

Quite amazing isn't it?

 

[Redwood]

Remo, it's not clear what you are arguing. Are you saying that Hess & Jennings described three separate events - demolition charges going off first, followed by the collapses of the Twin Towers? Wasn't this video shot after the fall of WTC 2, but before WTC 1? Where's the damage from those massive demo charges?

 

[Robrob]

Robrob, remo states that the building all of a sudden fell at free fall. Besides the lie that is his implication that free fall came on immediately, he ignores several seconds between the fall of the east penthouse and the fall of the north facade.

He also then is ignoring the various structural insults the building suffered over the course of approximately eight hours.

Quite amazing isn't it?

They ignore their own videos.

 

[remo]

The Failure of Imagination.

Drawing to the attention of the reader the Hotel ORIENT inferno as one essential example of uncontrolled steel framed building fires (which incidentally REMAINED STANDING), the WTC 7 'un-fought fires' argued here as 'cause for unrestrained free fall', are discussed by NIST itself as occurring in five separate locations and not as one multiple floor 'full-engagement', of which Orient and others including Windsor, are example. 'Normal (average) office furnishings fires' in different locations and constantly moving, only able to burn 20 minutes in any one place as the fire ranged about for furnishings fuel source.
Damage by debris from WTC1 demolition, was asymmetric, and does not argue for observable symmetry of WTC7 destruction. And, yes.Barry Jennings was very clear the massive explosion trapping them in WTC7 was a separate event occurring prior to either towers destruction. Just as Willie Rodreiguez and others were very clear the sub basement blasts killing many of their colleagues occurred BEFORE flight 11 hit Tower 1.

Your argument in response to NIST's reporting 2.25second FREE FALL of the 81 columned 47 storied steel framed high rise WTC7; to argue it fell FASTER than 'normal demolitions' therefore it ISN'T demolition, is an offence to thinking. It should be sueable.

Offering up a 6 or 7 storied BRICK apt.building fire with NO columns and statements that the NIST acknowledged FreeFall is 'not significant' is anti science and cover-up. "the acceleration bounced around- probably exceeding FREEFALL '. How does 'sequential' building collapse EXCEED FreeFall? By propulsion? oops. There were 81 columns in there just a moment ago....where did they ALL go ALL of a sudden to allow FREEFALL....to be exceeded?!

One hundred plus feet AT FREEFALL is as far and fast as beachnut fell onto his head without a parachute. is U N P R E C E D E N T E D without explosive/incendiary technique in all of steel framed high-rise history. That means "has not happened before or since" : that means 'Free fall' is THE MOST significant 'moment' in the recorded destruction of these three giant steel- framed high-rises because BY ITS VERY ACTION is prima facie demolition behaviour. not 'of no or little significance', but rather, because that behaviour has NEVER BEEN anything OTHER THAN controlled demolition behaviour, is of PRIMARY significance, first and foremost investigated AS demolition.

Instead, These small multiple fires were extrapolated by 'States secret' Protected computer algorithms into a theory. The 'low probability of occurring'(FEMA) hypothetical ThermalExpansion'walking beams' and free fall of Pinocchio Sunder ('speed of deceit:magic bolt). NIST have 'created' a 'new phenomena'. What part of that doesn't alert the skeptic to chicanery?
To have accepted and argue an untested hypothetical 'new phenomenon' as FACT, an invented theory so lame it cannot even stand by itself but must be protected by states secret privilege, is crime of science, building and investigative practice.

Whatever is ever said, that 2.25second window is opened..and countless thousands in the world have seen through it.

 

[beachnut]

... Barry Jennings was very clear the massive explosion trapping them in WTC7 was a separate event occurring prior to either towers destruction. ...

What caused your explosion which had no blast effects?

Massive? Then why is Barry alive? Because it was not an explosive, it was part of a WTC tower. It is clear Barry is stuck in WTC 7 after WTC towers collapsed; I got the video. Hard evidence makes failed claims lies.

... One hundred plus feet AT FREEFALL is as far and fast as beachnut fell onto his head without a parachute. is U N P R E C E D E N T E D without explosive/incendiary technique in all of steel framed high-rise history. ...

12 years of failure milking a fantasy of explosives, thermite and other insane claims made up by nuts like Jones and Harrit. You add lies to lies. This is what 911 truth does after 12 solid years of failure - repeat failed lies.

 

[remo]

Speed of deceit.

The testimony of Barry Jennings is VERY CLEAR. You do not get to change what Barry Jennings experienced and testified to and NEVER RECANTED. That is not your right! He may well have died for it. He told us many times, the 'massive explosion' trapping him and Hess inside WTC7 happened sometime around 9:30am, before either tower came down - one solid HOUR before tower one came down, and they remained there until just before midday. "All the time I'm hearing all type of explosions. All this time, I'm hearing explosions"(uncut.pt1.3:57-4:05). He was an 'old boiler guy'...he knew what an explosion sounds like. That he survived is the particular of that moment. People do. They did. The blast was beneath them. it "blew them back'

Jennings told Dylan Avery, who pointed out to Jennings EXACTLY what you, beachnut, are trying to construe, that this explosion was debris from the north tower, to which Jennings responded:"No. What happened was, when we made it back to the 8th floor, as I told you earlier,both buildings were still standing"( Barry Jennings uncut,part 2, at 4:52-5:17) He further states:"I was trapped in there when both buildings came down. The firefighters came...and then they ran away. See, I didn't know what was going on. That's when the first tower fell. When they started running, the first tower was coming down. I had no way of knowing that. Then I saw them come back with more concern on their faces. Instead they ran away again: the second tower fell. So, they turned and ran the second time,the guy said, " Don't worry, we'll be back for you. And they did come back" ( uncut,part 1at2:49-3:44) Jennings repeated:"When we got to the sixth floor, there was an explosion. That's what forced us back to the Eight floor. Both buildings were still standing. Keep in mind, I told you the fire department came and ran. They came twice. Why? Because Building Tower One fell, then Tower Two fell. and then when they came back, they came back all concerned to get me the hell out of there, and they did."(uncut,pt2,5:08-5:33)

This is unambiguous. You do not get to change Barry Jennings testimony.

 

[Mark F]

The testimony of Barry Jennings is VERY CLEAR. You do not get to change what Barry Jennings experienced and testified to and NEVER RECANTED. QUOTE]

But we do get to say SO WHAT? What does an explosion at 9:30am have to do with a collapse event at 5:20pm? What are you trying to imply this alleged explosion means? Are you trying to say this explosion was caused by explosives? If so, where is your proof? Explosions can be caused by many things not having to do with explosives, particularly when dealing with raging fires and multiple aircraft crashes.

Please present your complete, comprehensive, evidence-based prima facie case for what you think really happened on 9/11 covering EVERYTHING we know starting from about 1993. No cherry-picking, no quote-mining, no leaving inconvenient facts out.

Until you do, like all who have come before you there is nothing here to talk about.

 

[LSSBB]

Drawing to the attention of the reader the Hotel ORIENT inferno as one essential example of uncontrolled steel framed building fires (which incidentally REMAINED STANDING), the WTC 7 'un-fought fires' argued here as 'cause for unrestrained free fall', are discussed by NIST itself as occurring in five separate locations and not as one multiple floor 'full-engagement', of which Orient and others including Windsor, are example. 'Normal (average) office furnishings fires' in different locations and constantly moving, only able to burn 20 minutes in any one place as the fire ranged about for furnishings fuel source.
Damage by debris from WTC1 demolition, was asymmetric, and does not argue for observable symmetry of WTC7 destruction. And, yes.Barry Jennings was very clear the massive explosion trapping them in WTC7 was a separate event occurring prior to either towers destruction. Just as Willie Rodreiguez and others were very clear the sub basement blasts killing many of their colleagues occurred BEFORE flight 11 hit Tower 1.

Your argument in response to NIST's reporting 2.25second FREE FALL of the 81 columned 47 storied steel framed high rise WTC7; to argue it fell FASTER than 'normal demolitions' therefore it ISN'T demolition, is an offence to thinking. It should be sueable.

Offering up a 6 or 7 storied BRICK apt.building fire with NO columns and statements that the NIST acknowledged FreeFall is 'not significant' is anti science and cover-up. "the acceleration bounced around- probably exceeding FREEFALL '. How does 'sequential' building collapse EXCEED FreeFall? By propulsion? oops. There were 81 columns in there just a moment ago....where did they ALL go ALL of a sudden to allow FREEFALL....to be exceeded?!

One hundred plus feet AT FREEFALL is as far and fast as beachnut fell onto his head without a parachute. is U N P R E C E D E N T E D without explosive/incendiary technique in all of steel framed high-rise history. That means "has not happened before or since" : that means 'Free fall' is THE MOST significant 'moment' in the recorded destruction of these three giant steel- framed high-rises because BY ITS VERY ACTION is prima facie demolition behaviour. not 'of no or little significance', but rather, because that behaviour has NEVER BEEN anything OTHER THAN controlled demolition behaviour, is of PRIMARY significance, first and foremost investigated AS demolition.

Instead, These small multiple fires were extrapolated by 'States secret' Protected computer algorithms into a theory. The 'low probability of occurring'(FEMA) hypothetical ThermalExpansion'walking beams' and free fall of Pinocchio Sunder ('speed of deceit:magic bolt). NIST have 'created' a 'new phenomena'. What part of that doesn't alert the skeptic to chicanery?
To have accepted and argue an untested hypothetical 'new phenomenon' as FACT, an invented theory so lame it cannot even stand by itself but must be protected by states secret privilege, is crime of science, building and investigative practice.

Whatever is ever said, that 2.25second window is opened..and countless thousands in the world have seen through it.

NIST only averaged the accelerations. Their curve is therefore not accurate. Femr2 performed a more accurate analysis, and so have others. That said, even the NIST curve shows accelerations greater than free fall. NIST was wrong therefore to state a prolonged period of free fall, when their own data does not show it. And a collapse led from the inside can result in an averaged acceleration curve for exterior collapse that matches he NIST curve.

 

[Dog Town]

U N P R E C E D E N T E D.

SO WHAT?

 

[pgimeno]

Drawing to the attention of the reader the Hotel ORIENT inferno as one essential example of uncontrolled steel framed building fires (which incidentally REMAINED STANDING),

You're mistaken. The Mandarin Oriental Hotel was a CONCRETE FRAMED building. Do these pillars look like steel to you?

ETA: another picture showing a closer look of the pillars:
http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2287/1840203666_709df3d8ce_z.jpg

the WTC 7 'un-fought fires' argued here as 'cause for unrestrained free fall', are discussed by NIST itself as occurring in five separate locations and not as one multiple floor 'full-engagement', of which Orient and others including Windsor, are example.

Windsor? You're not very good at bringing up examples, are you?

The Windsor building had a CONCRETE core and a STEEL perimeter.

Look what happened:

Oh my! the CONCRETE remained standing, the STEEL collapsed!

Look at all the steel piled up while the concrete core stands...

You've been so misguided again and again by the siren chants of the conspiracy salesmen. It's time to wake up and face FACTS.

And one such FACT is that EVERY UNFOUGHT FIRE in a steel high-rise in history has BROUGHT THE BUILDING DOWN.

The "unprecedented" meme won't cut it.

Offering up a 6 or 7 storied BRICK apt.building fire with NO columns and statements that the NIST acknowledged FreeFall is 'not significant' is anti science and cover-up. "the acceleration bounced around- probably exceeding FREEFALL '. How does 'sequential' building collapse EXCEED FreeFall? By propulsion? oops.

That's what reveals that you're unqualified to evaluate the physics involved.

Also, do demolition charges exert propulsion downwards???? No, of course not. It means that it has NO PRECEDENT IN DEMOLITIONS either. I told you that that argument would blow back, but you didn't want to listen.

One hundred plus feet AT FREEFALL is as far and fast as beachnut fell onto his head without a parachute. is U N P R E C E D E N T E D without explosive/incendiary technique in all of steel framed high-rise history. That means "has not happened before or since" : that means 'Free fall' is THE MOST significant 'moment' in the recorded destruction of these three giant steel- framed high-rises

So far, you're right. It was also U N P R E C E D E N T E D that a building was hit by a 767. So far, the 767 has an outstanding record of being 100% effective in bringing a building down.

It was also U N P R E C E D E N T E D that a high-rise steel-framed building had unfought fires lasting that long. Therefore we can say from that experience that unfought fires in steel-framed high rises are likely to bring the building down.

Still wanting to stick to that meme?

because BY ITS VERY ACTION is prima facie demolition behaviour. not 'of no or little significance', but rather, because that behaviour has NEVER BEEN anything OTHER THAN controlled demolition behaviour, is of PRIMARY significance, first and foremost investigated AS demolition.

No, you're absolutely wrong here. Free fall has NEVER happened in any such demolition. Never. Ever.

If you want to continue arguing that point, you'll have to show at least ONE example of a demolition of a high-rise steel-framed building that fell in free fall.

 

[ozeco41]

A neat slap down post pgimeno.

It is sad that we still see these idiocies posted but we do and an occasional put down is warranted. This reversal was neat:

So far, you're right. It was also U N P R E C E D E N T E D that a building was hit by a 767. So far, the 767 has an outstanding record of being 100% effective in bringing a building down.

Well said.

 

[jaydeehess]

It had 81 columns of steel meshed together beam and girder locked into one great grunting matrix of high grade builders steel Silverstein had strengthened to above specs. to serve the secure needs of the many Government agencies living within. It had the largest CIA field office outside Langely

Anyone know what remo is spouting about here? Silverstein had the structure altered?
Do CIA agents weigh more than the average person? Did the entire structure have to be strengthened and altered to accommodate them after Silverstein acquired it? .

remo, in above posts you were asked about the hilited claim you made.

Have you forgotten that you were asked to explain what the H you are talking about or did you simply make this up out of thin air.
furthermore, IF Silverstein did do upgrades that you claim were done did these get done on every floor? Did this include upgrades to the column system? Just a floor of two? Can you explain what effect any such possible upgrades would have had on whether or not the global collapse illustrated in the NIST report could take place?

 

[jaydeehess]

One wonders what this would have looked like if not only did the perimeter steel fail, but had the core also consisted of steel columns and they failed as well...........

 

[jaydeehess]

The testimony of Barry Jennings is VERY CLEAR. You do not get to change what Barry Jennings experienced and testified to and NEVER RECANTED. .............This is unambiguous. You do not get to change Barry Jennings testimony.

Yes, we all know what Jennings characterized as his experience. You are saying that eyewitness testimony is tantamount to gospel. Tell that to everyone first convicted based on eyewitness testimony and later aquited by DNA evidence.

In order to accept eyewitness statements one REQUIRES corrroboration by either multiple other witnesses or, preferably, physical or documentary evidence.
In this case we have neither. We have Jennings & Hess saying there was an explosion that made the stairs impassable. Firefighters later went through the building to check that no one was in there AND to assess the structural damage from the inside. No reports from the firefighters that the east stairs were impassable, no report of possible explosive damage. Fire fighters walked, iirc, the entire length of the fifth floor but reported no such damage. There were videos taken inside the building after the fall of WTC 2 as well, and none of these videos illustrate and such damage.

How do you reconcile this lack of corroboration with J & H? Were all the FFs in -on-it? Were all such reports supressed and the FFs cowed into not saying anything about it later? Were videos taken inside 7WTC later edited to remove any such evidence?
OR
Were Jennings and Hess, alone in a dark stairwell, after the collapse of a tower(or both) , then in a smoke and dust filled darkened structure, simply mistaken about elapsed time?